The league can survive a two year lockout... hell, a 3 year lockout... They will be fine long term. It is the players who can't afford to miss this time. Some run off to Europe, but there simply isn't space for all of them. The players will cave, the owners do not care how long this takes... The guy who signs your paycheck will ultimately be the one who determines how much of the pie he gives you.

Sure, the KHL will steal primarily Russian superstars if the NHL is locked out long term. But you aren't going to get the majority of Americans/Canadians to sign oversees... moving Their families, being across the pond fromextended family and friends... when the NHL comes back with the deal they want. You are not going to get the American/Canadian fan bases to ignore the NHL and pay attention solely to the KHL and other elite leagues overseas.

The players are not 'partners'. They are tradable commodities that at any moment can be traded, injured, etc.

The sooner the players realize this, the sooner we can get back to hockey.

Wouldn't be surprised if Kovalchuk, Datsyuk , Ovechkin etc. stayed in Russia even when the lock-out is done, if it goes long-term.

0

"BELIEVE in our team. We've had difficult momments as a fanbase, but we will get out of it"

Wouldn't be surprised if Kovalchuk, Datsyuk , Ovechkin etc. stayed in Russia even when the lock-out is done, if it goes long-term.

Major implications would take place for every Russian player if these guys do not come back and finish their contracts. They will be breaking international rules between the NHL and other leagues which would allow the international committee to forbid Russian players from playing in the Olympics and in the KHL.

Players saying they will stay overseas are just talking out of their rear end.

Major implications would take place for every Russian player if these guys do not come back and finish their contracts. They will be breaking international rules between the NHL and other leagues which would allow the international committee to forbid Russian players from playing in the Olympics and in the KHL.

Players saying they will stay overseas are just talking out of their rear end.

The players may face implications, but what implications would the league have to face for forcing players to take a pay cut on a contract that had been signed and agreed upon? This is going to turn into a huge mess if they miss a season, especially when you add in the fact that the NHL doesn't want to allow players to play in the 2014 Olympics and the KHL of course will.

The owners are going to have to accept some kind of revenue sharing to help the weaker teams or they are going to have the same problems when they come back.

0

Official NJDevs.com Keeper of Gory Corey Schwab, Mike Peluso, Troy Crowder, Jeff Frazee, and Rich Shulmistra."The Devils are that zombie that takes an ax to the skull, a bullet to the temple and is set on fire … and yet keeps lumbering along to the annoyance of all the other zombies." - Puck Daddy

The players may face implications, but what implications would the league have to face for forcing players to take a pay cut on a contract that had been signed and agreed upon? This is going to turn into a huge mess if they miss a season, especially when you add in the fact that the NHL doesn't want to allow players to play in the 2014 Olympics and the KHL of course will.

The owners are going to have to accept some kind of revenue sharing to help the weaker teams or they are going to have the same problems when they come back.

The players aren't getting out of this without an immediate pay cut. It's just not possible, unless the escrow system gets pulled off the table, in which case you are looking at replacement players, a multiple year lock out, and so forth. If they miss a full year and the players don't take 'an immediate paycut', they will end up taking one anyway.

The players aren't getting out of this without an immediate pay cut. It's just not possible, unless the escrow system gets pulled off the table, in which case you are looking at replacement players, a multiple year lock out, and so forth. If they miss a full year and the players don't take 'an immediate paycut', they will end up taking one anyway.

Yeah, the owners hold the power and will most likely get their way. I was just pointing out that the players face punishment if they stay in Europe, while the owners face no punishment for refusing to pay what was agreed upon. My other point was that unless the owners do something to help the smaller market teams, we will be right back here again as soon as this next CBA runs out.

0

Official NJDevs.com Keeper of Gory Corey Schwab, Mike Peluso, Troy Crowder, Jeff Frazee, and Rich Shulmistra."The Devils are that zombie that takes an ax to the skull, a bullet to the temple and is set on fire … and yet keeps lumbering along to the annoyance of all the other zombies." - Puck Daddy

Not to try to make this political, but does anyone else see this "Wastebook 2012" thing affecting the lockout?

For anyone who didn't catch it, apparently the NFL got itself out of paying $91M in taxes by classifying itself as non-profit, and the NHL (and PGA, too) take advantage of the same non-profit, tax-exempt status. (Also worth note, MLB gave up its tax-exempt status in 2007.)

If suddenly the NHL needs to reclassify itself and start paying taxes, is that gonna make the league want even more concessions to make up for lost money? Or will negative PR from labeling themselves as being the same kind of organization as the Red Cross make them humble up and end this damn thing?

Not to try to make this political, but does anyone else see this "Wastebook 2012" thing affecting the lockout?

For anyone who didn't catch it, apparently the NFL got itself out of paying $91M in taxes by classifying itself as non-profit, and the NHL (and PGA, too) take advantage of the same non-profit, tax-exempt status. (Also worth note, MLB gave up its tax-exempt status in 2007.)

If suddenly the NHL needs to reclassify itself and start paying taxes, is that gonna make the league want even more concessions to make up for lost money? Or will negative PR from labeling themselves as being the same kind of organization as the Red Cross make them humble up and end this damn thing?

Probably grasping at straws here.

I don't think it will matter all that much. These negotiations aren't really about what's fair or how much the owners or players think they ought to be making. It's just a matter of who blinks first and how much leverage one side has over the other. The last time around, it just wasn't worth it for the owners to operate the business without a much more owner friendly CBA which ultimately put the players in a bind. I don't think the taxes the NHL has to pay will enter so much into the equation.

Also, while I'm not a tax expert, seems to me that whether the league has to pay income tax doesn't really have all that much of an effect, since the amount the league pays in taxes will offset the owners income and hence the direct taxes the owners have to pay.

I don't think there's anything inherently sneaky about the league classifying itself as a non-profit.

0

I collect spores, molds and fungus.Hello fellow American. This you should vote me. I leave power. Good. Thank you, thank you. If you vote me, I'm hot. What? Taxes, they'll be lower... son. The Democratic vote is the right thing to do Philadelphia, so do.How do you spot risk? How do you avoid risk? And what makes it so risky?

its a 50-50 split and apparently there is no phasing into the 50-50 split BUT per TG:"Don't know details yet, but from what I'm told NHL proposal in some way protects player salaries as is in 2012-13. Interested to see how."If the Fehr comes out and does his normal "no progress" BS im ganna go ape sh!t. Im in class right now though so it would probably make a great story if I did flip out.

Am I missing something? What are the owners conceding with this offer? 50-50 sounds nice and fair but at the end of the day they are still asking the players to take a 7% cut while they give themselves a 7% raise, right? What are the players getting out of this?

0

"Swim against the tide, don't follow the group, stay away from the majority, seek out the fresh and new, stay away from the poseurs, and don't be a barnacle. Be original, be different, be passionate, be selfless and be free. Be a hockey fan."
--John Buccigross

Am I missing something? What are the owners conceding with this offer? 50-50 sounds nice and fair but at the end of the day they are still asking the players to take a 7% cut while they give themselves a 7% raise, right? What are the players getting out of this?

No immediate paycut and the league promised to give money back in other ways (no idea how though)